The Humber Bridge paths have been closed to cyclists and pedestrians ‘indefinitely’ due to an unspecified ‘recent incident’.
The Humber Bridge Board announced the decision on Saturday afternoon on the back of an incident on the bridge, report the Hull Daily Mail.
It is not yet known when – or if – the pathways will be reopened.
A spokesperson for the Humber Bridge Board said: “Due to a recent incident, we have taken the decision to close the footways on both sides of the Humber Bridge for an indefinite period.
“We appreciate this might cause some inconvenience, but we ask that pedestrians and cyclists respect the decision and avoid the Humber Bridge at the present time.”
The decision comes after multiple deaths at the bridge in the month of March.
A petition has since been launched calling for extra measures to help ‘secure’ the Humber Bridge and prevent or significantly reduce the amount of suicide attempts there.
The paths on either side of the 1.4 mile (2,200m) long bridge carry thousands pedestrians and cyclists to work every day.
The bridge on the outskirts of Hull crosses the Humber estuary linking East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.
It opened in 1981 and is the seventh longest suspension bridge in the world.
The Samaritans website contains advice to people who are struggling with their mental health on how they can obtain help.
The charity’s advisors can be contacted at any time on the free telephone number 116 123, or via email to jo@samaritans.org with a response time of 24 hours.
It has also developed a self-help app that enables users to “Keep track of how you’re feeling, and get recommendations for things you can do to help yourself cope, feel better and stay safe in a crisis.”
93 thoughts on “Humber Bridge path closed to cyclists ‘indefinitely’”
So the bridge authorities
So the bridge authorities have arranged for a free and frequent shuttle bus service to replace the closed sections? ? ?
Mungecrundle wrote:
How many KSIs on Britain’s
How many KSIs on Britain’s roads each day ?
Let’s close the roads.
What’s to prevent a car
What’s to prevent a car driver stopping on the bridge and jumping off. Close the bridge to everyone that should stop people killing themselves; not.
Without knowing more about
Without knowing more about the reasons for the closure, I’m a bit wary of saying this is ridiculous. But it is ridiculous, isn’t it?
Add it on to reasons why
Add it on to reasons why cyclists use the carriageway…
“Why don’t you cycle on the bloody cycle path?”
“Because we’re not allowed to.”
Not sure it will be a whole lot safer, but who are we to know?
Sriracha wrote:
What’s the roadway like over the bridge? Could you use off road paths up to the bridge, go over the bridge on the road, then come off again? Still got to be better than seventy miles the long way around?
If the authority dropped the
If the authority dropped the speed limit across the bridge all cyclists should be able to use it safely. Then they just need to lay on buses for the pedestrians.
IanMK wrote:
Exactly!
To an extent this is true,
To an extent this is true, but it’s often very very windy on the bridge. Even with vehicles going very very slowly I don’t think I’d want to cycle with traffic on there. I’ve seen cyclists blown off their bikes on the cycle path a fair few times. Not too dangerous in those circumstances but certainly not ideal when combined with lorries and buses.
I alreayd know of at least
I alreayd know of at least one cyclist who has decided to use the carriageway here (even though it’s technically prohibited, when faced with a 50 mile diversion, it’s hardly unreasonable). So the board have, in order to stop people from taking their own lives at this particular spot, put the lives of other people in jeopardy by mixing it up with motor traffic on a dual carriageway with high winds…
If an incident occurs, corporate manslaughter?
This sounds like a cheap
This sounds like a cheap-skate way of addressing a symptom of mental illness rather than putting some effort into dealing with the underlying causes. Keep the bridge open and at least make some Samaritans resources available and ideally provide decent counselling facilities. I’d be concerned that they’re just going to shift the problem elsewhere, so instead of so many bridge jumpers there’ll be greater hospital admissions for pill overdoses etc.
The problem isn’t the bridge.
And yet, cycling is widely
And yet, cycling is widely acknowledged to have a positive effect on mental health. So close the bridge to cyclists. It makes sense, unfortunately, if you only take stock of one side of the balance.
Indeed, but there’s a timing
Indeed, but there’s a timing mismatch. Cycling can help with mental health but isn’t going to do much quickly enough for someone whose life is so hard to endure that they would rather end it.
We have a mental health crisis and despite heroic efforts from some on the front line, it is not going away. In part this is due to lack of resources to treat people. But it’s also because modern life gives many people little chance. Genetics, trauma, bad luck also play their roles, and we are still short of proven ways to prevent or treat the illness.
TheBillder wrote:
Are we though? We know what works, and we know the causes, but we can’t disrupt society to make people happy can we? Does society exist to make a few people rich or to make most people happy?
Look at the countries which are the most happy, and learn the lessons.
The first step is to stop
The first step is to stop measuring the progress of a country in GDP and start measuring how happy it’s citizens are instead.
IanMK wrote:
You can’t measure happiness
You can’t meaningfully
You can’t meaningfully measure GDP, but it doesn’t stop people from trying.
There are lots of proposed
There are lots of proposed methods measuring happiness. The problem is that none have gained universal traction. Individual countries advocating their own methodology. Humans are naturally competitive, unless counties agree on one method and organise a league table we won’t be reporting on our standing annually.
This is basically the success of GDP. There are other methods of measuring the economy but at the end of the day we like to do comparisons.
it isnt you are right, and it
it isnt you are right, and it is a sad reflection of the way we deal with mental illness, rather than tackling the underlying causes and providing the real support for that before individuals find themselves in this position that this becomes necessary
but there is real evidence that removing the opportunity for people to easily access these kind of locations, actually does work, it interrupts the process, provides an extra stop on the way, that might mean an intervention works or a person reconsiders their choices.
the question becomes not so much about whether the bridge is closed to pedestrians/cyclists, but how does it reopen to be safe for everyone to use it.
hawkinspeter wrote:
The problem isn’t the bridge. And therefore the Bridge Board have no means off addressing the problem, but have to deal with its consequences. It’s one of many problems where the consequences are felt individually and locally but the solution can only be taken by everyone acting together, from schools to employers to GPs to MPs to, ooh, highway authorities and on and on…
As far as I can see, somebody
As far as I can see, somebody living in Barton-upon-Humber and cycling 8 miles to work at HRI would now have a 66 mile journey. I think the Humber Bridge Board needs to make itself a bit more accountable, and show itself to be working very hard to put this situation right.
I remember being very miffed
I remember being very miffed off, one time I got up to the Clifton Suspension Bridge and the police were stopping people crossing due to “an incident”. No notice anywhere until you got to (I think) the Sion Hill junction. Detour was back into town and along the Portway, or into town and then up Rownham Hill, etc. A couple of extra miles onto my journey so annoying but not a big deal.
Imagine rocking up to the Humber Bridge and being told nope, sorry, you’ll have to go around???
Surely a bridge like that, they have some sort of obligation to provide a way for everyone to get across?
Given the (lack of) details
Given the (lack of) details apparently available, assuming that this is to prevent suicides seems rather speculative. It could, for example, be that an incident has raised concerns about whether issues with the surfaces might be making them dangerous.
So how’s this going to work?
How’s this going to work? They ask that cyclists “respect the decision”.
So if some poor soul is intent on throwing themselves off, will they just meekly shrug their shoulders in disappointment and reflect on Dorothy Parker’s Resumé?
Or else will the bridge authorities console the bereaved with the admonishment that it should never have happened, and there’s an unpaid fine to be settled?
They can enforce it because
They can enforce it because the Humber Bridge bye-laws permit assault of pedestrians and cyclists by private contractors provided the force is “reasonable” and in order to prevent access.
Couldn’t the bridge have
Couldn’t the bridge have jumpers on the downstream cyclists on the other. I’m all equal opportunities
CXR94Di2 wrote:
“Jumpers” are real people suffering from a potentially fatal illness that impairs rational thought and can cause acute despair. They also have families and friends who care about them (believe it or not).
The impact of this illness is widespread, from the individual, to their friends and family, to the emergency services and others affected by a stranger’s death.
The good news is that in its chronic state the illness can be manageable if not curable. Even its acute state, where the greatest immediate risk manifests, can be treated.
It helps though not to dehumanise people who are suffering an acute illness by labelling them “jumpers”.
Look up Simon Mason bp – that
Look up Simon Mason bp – that’s me.
That’s awful, but I’m glad
That’s awful, but I’m glad you’re still with us.
Mrs Hawkinspeter suffered from positional vertigo for a short time – that’s where you have some calcium deposits caught in your inner ear that gave her a spinning sensation in certain positions. Luckily we found a series of movements (on YouTube – Epley manoeuvre) that can help to clear them. It looked really odd when she’d sit up in bed and I could see her eyes flicking left and right.
swldxer wrote:
I can only second HP’s comment. Glad you’re still with us, and I hope things have got better with time.
Inappropriate, the suicides
Inappropriate, the suicides leave families and friends behind who are all asking “why?” I sincerely hope you are never in that position.
This was on my route today,
This was on my route today, circular 75 miles crossing the Humber Bridge 12 miles from the end. Luckily someone told me it was closed 8 miles before, but then had a 42 mile slightly more direct retrace of my route. Was a bit annoyed at first but forced me to do a few more miles
.
Mostly working from home but my commute is now impossible by bike. Maybe they could put a shuttle bus on between the 2 ends. There is regular bus service but that won’t help most cyclists
.
Just to provide a bit of
Just to provide a bit of context, for as long as I can remember there have been calls to alter the bridge and make it harder for people to take their own lives by jumping from it. A few months back there were two young men who took their lives within minutes of one and other. In the last week or so I understand that six people committed suicide, and as if that wasn’t tragic enough what is especially concerning is that some of them, I’m afraid, were schoolchildren.
FWIW I think this will be a temporary ban, and I think it has come about because the bridge board doesn’t have the resources to alter the bridge in an appropriate way. I think this is their way of highlighting their concerns and trying to get the funding from other authorities. I don’t think they’re cynical, just desperate. Of course, I could be wrong.
The last time I went over the Humber Bridge – a couple of months ago – the east side pedestrian and cycle shared path was still closed as it had been for a very long time. It was unpleasant and crowded with groups and dog walkers. I hadn’t any plans to go over again. I’m now wondering if one side was closed so that the bridge staff had only the western “footway” to monitor.
I don’t envy the bridge board. They must have been under a lot of pressure. Even though the Humber Bridge is on the National Cycle Network Route 1, leisure cyclists, dog walkers and runners have got quite a lot of options on “their” side of the estuary. The MP for West Hull and Hessle, Emma Hardy, is seeking clarification from the bridge board about how pedestrians and cycle commuters who live on one side and work on the other will manage. There has been some talk of a shuttle service, but at the moment that’s all it is – talk.
Woldsman wrote:
Yes they do; it’s a four lane highway, two lanes for motor traffic in each direction. It would be simplicity itself to close two of them, one in each direction, for pedestrians and cyclists. If I was feeling particularly generous, then only close one lane, and use the motor lane thus freed as a tidal lane changing direction with the heaviest flow.
But of course we can’t inconvenience the drivers can we, only pedestrians and cyclists.
As far as I know there hasn’t
As far as I know there hasn’t been a significant problem with people driving into the bridge then jumping off. There is an issue with pedestrians and cyclists. Stop being a tool and show a modicum of compassion for what is a horrible situation.
a4th wrote:
The issue is only with peds/cyclists because drivers don’t have access. We still don’t know what the incident is that they are using as a reason to close the bridge to legitimate users; it might be a horrible situation, but we don’t know. Do they close motorways after someone has deliberately driven into a bridge as a form of suicide?
Look up: Instead, she drove
Look up: Instead, she drove to the Humber Bridge, parked her Saab in the car park, and climbed over the railings.
eburtthebike wrote:
With the greatest respect, your argument is at best wrong-headed. It’s clear you know little about the Humber Bridge beyond the number of lanes, so let me enlighten you and those who have liked your ill-informed comment.
One of the reasons it was possible for the Humber Bridge to be designed to last for 120 years was that lessons were learned from the failed Tacomo Narrow bridge – opened less than 40 years before the Humber Bridge was completed. Like you – and the designers of the Tacomo Narrow bridge – I’m not an expert on torsional vibration and aeroelastic fluttering, but suffice to say that a third of the way in to its planned service life the bridge is still standing. This is due in no small part to construction methods that equalise the pressures above and below the suspended section of the bridge. This makes vehicles on the carriageway especially susceptible to side winds.
Let me relate to you an anecdote of the one and only occasion I had to drive over the Humber Bridge for work, in order to illustrate why having cyclists and pedestrians on the main deck is not, IMHO, an exercise in “simplicity itself”. For the last few years there have been tag lanes on the toll booths at the north bank (all toll booths are at the north bank) on the outside lanes. I followed a large lorry, the driver of which became hesitant when approaching the point of no return as he entered the tag lane. I held back because I wasn’t sure what he was going to do next (the driver was a ‘he’, as I later discovered). Tag lane drivers just go straight through whereas others from the inside lanes pay at the booths. Further along they merge. I pulled back rather than trying to overtake and squeeze in front of a slower car on the inside. God alone knows why but not long after the lorry and a hatchback collided. I watched the scene unfold in that slow motion sort of way that these things seem to happen as the small car spun around – with bits of it flying off in all directions – and crashed in to the central barrier facing the wrong way. After checking the driver of the car was okay and that an ambulance had been called I, along with a woman who was driving another car, tried to sweep the debris aside with our feet. The car’s entire rear bumper had been torn off in the collision and after I brushed it away from the eastern “footway” it blew across the two lanes like a discarded crisp packet. The bridge wasn’t even closed to high-sided vehicles that day, but I had to lean in to the wind, before getting back in to my car and squeezing past the other vehicles (After trying unsuccessfully to secure the bumper somewhere on the bridge I stuffed it in to the boot of my car along with assorted larger broken off bits from the lorry’s lights and later took them to the nearby tip during the first lockdown.)
Mixing lorries, pedestrians and cyclists on the main carriageway is not a realistic option. Coming from the East Yorkshire side three of my ride buddies once turned back because they couldn’t physically get past the north tower, such was the strength of the wind. I have no idea whether the main road was closed to high-sided vehicles that particular day but, evidently, the “footway”, in the shelter of the main structure, wasn’t.
As a measure of how wide of the mark your thinking is you might compare the closure of the “footways” with the failed attempt by Highways England to enforce a TRO relating to a stretch of the A63 – including the part of it which runs underneath the Humber Bridge – that would have made it off limits to cyclists. To my knowledge there was no one locally more vociferous than the then curate of St Helen’s church in Welton. His case – he would have been prevented from using the roundabouts to cross the A63 from his home on one side to the church on the other – was one cited by Cycling UK in their successful appeal against the TRO. The same cyclist, now a vicar elsewhere, made this remark when pressed to give his thoughts about the Humber Bridge ban:
“Unless there is a culture shift in our country to support people in depression, distress and loneliness, and to change the narrative that “life isn’t worth it” we’ll not see an end to heartbreaking incidents like these.”
and
“When Highways England wanted to ban cycling on the A63 because “cyclists can’t keep up” we led a successful Cycling UK campaign to overturn that. The Humber Bridge is private property, I’m not sure what cycling access we could claim to have a right to.”
So even he doesn’t think that this is a fight to take up.
Re: “But of course we can’t inconvenience the drivers can we, only pedestrians and cyclists”. In fact drivers, and motorcyclists and moped riders are routinely inconvenienced for reasons of safety – as they were just this weekend. Whenever there is a high wind drivers of specific classes of motor vehicles are made to go around the Humber. Of course, motorists are much more able to do this than cyclists, and whenever there is the notification that “high-sided and wind-vulnerable” vehicles are prohibited a tweet with this graphic is meant to be sent out:
https://twitter.com/HumBridgeNews/status/1376379199418679298/photo/1
Frustratingly, the bridge board hasn’t even mentioned the ban on the news section of its web site, and there hasn’t been any further information given out by the board on Twitter. However, these words were spoken by presenter Leanne Brown on BBC Look North’s 10.20 bulletin last night:
“Managers at the Humber Bridge say they want to open its footpaths as soon as possible after closing them completely on Saturday. They say they took the decision to close the walkways as an emergency response to unprecedented and deeply troubling events over recent weeks, and that the measure has been implemented to protect staff and the public.”
Something, I don’t know what either, needs to be done in the long term.
As cyclists it sometimes feels as though the world is against us. Perhaps in this instance we should consider that this might not be the case.
Woldsman wrote:
Thank you for your fascinating anecdotes.
Sorry, did I say fascinating? I meant verbose, tedious and irrelevant.
If I can try to dredge some sort of meaning from your endless trivia, I think you are saying that because you once saw a collision between two vehicles on the approach lanes, any cyclist riding there would die. You might not have noticed but collisions between motor vehicles occur on all roads, but cyclists aren’t banned from them.
Then you wander off into another sideshow about another road entirely and some religious officer which you apparently think proves your point; it doesn’t.
And finally (!) you tell us what we already know; that no reason has been given for the closure.
Maybe your post was fascinating, in some dreadful, horrific way like “OMG, when’s it going to end and will it ever get relevant” kind of way.
eburtthebike wrote:
Okay, I’ll make it simple. Let’s leave aside the certainty that even a moderate sidewind would be dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians on this particular bridge. There’s a flaw in your cunning plan (and let’s remember that the bridge board has brought in this – hopefully temporary – ban to prevent people from taking their own lives). The barrier on the road is around mid thigh height. The barrier on the “footway” is around chest height. So anyone making their way to take their own life will have less of an effort to get off the road and slide down than they will have to climb over the footway barrier.
Some have asked what’s to prevent drivers from stopping on the bridge then taking their own lives. As far as I can tell this has very rarely happened – if at all – but one of the things that makes this a particularly worrying trend is that many of those who have died just lately haven’t been around long enough to learn how to drive.
I want the bridge to be open to cyclists and pedestrians. And I don’t know what changes the bridge board can make in the short term to satisfy themselves that it can be made “secure” as the local paper puts it. I just hope that at least a shuttle service for commuter cyclists and pedestrians can be put on very soon. Leisure cyclists, runners, (dog) walkers etc will – in the short term at least – just have to suck it up, I’m afraid. It’s not like there aren’t plenty of options on both sides of the estuary to keep physically and mentally fit.
Please accept my apologies if I used too many words again.
Woldsman wrote:
No you didn’t and yes you did.
Soz.
Soz.
Woldsman wrote:
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Socrati2, or Son of Socrati, or maybe Socraticlone; whatever, from the same mould of fact dodging, logic free, subject changing unbridled verbosity as the master himself.
You’ve made some really good
You’ve made some really good points there. The wind issue is a major factor – it was almost a cliche that Viking Radio’s traffic report would include that the Humber Bridge was closed to high-sided traffic because of strong winds. Bracing, but I can see how that could be a huge problem for cyclists in the main carriageway rather than protected on the footpaths/cycleways.
But I still think the Bridge authorities are being rightly criticised for not putting any thought into an alternative for those cyclists who have a need to get over the Bridge. It’s a strong indication that they don’t consider cycling as a means of transport.
Again, I know we are a
Again, I know we are a cycling specific channel but they haven’t put any thought into anyone but cars and above. Almost like they have decided that anyone crossing now needs to pay and why have to put some of that profit into supplying alternate crossing methods.
Imagine if they had said the
Imagine if they had said the bridge would be closed to vehicles indefinitely, without any explanation. Would anyone have thought that was acceptable?
A lot of really horrible and
A lot of really horrible and callous posts on this story. There have been an unusually high number of suicide attempts recently so while this is a drastic measure it does give people time to work out what can be done. Before everyone starts shouting please try and remember that this is a sad and horrible story and it’s really unpleasant for everyone involved- including the people who work for the Humber Bridge Board.
I remember walking across
I remember walking across about 5 years ago, the railings are rather low and the walkways are below the level of the roadway, which makes you feel rather vulnerable. I was glad to get to the other side and off. I can only imagine the effect on someone who is contemplating ending it all. RIP.
matthewn5 wrote:
Good job we’re not all alike Matt; I walked it soon after it opened and thought it was magnificent.
I grew up on the south side
I grew up on the south side of the Humber and remember my mother taking me for a trip across it in late 1981 – you had to really search for your treats in those days. We meant to park up on the south side and walk across, but my mum got confused by the road signs and we ended up on the slip road so had to got across (and pay the toll) then walk across from the north side. ?
As a teenager, it was pretty common for “sponsored walks” and the like to take place across the bridge.
I’ve walked and run across it many times – like you, I think it’s magnificent.
The Milk Race went across it
The Milk Race went across it in 81 just after it was built as when I was looking for pics on it, the search terms brought up one of the Peloton just approaching.
It would appear that the
It would appear that the majority of locals don’t think this is a good idea either:
“4,500 Hull Live readers vote in Humber Bridge footpath closure poll”.
“Over 4,000 Hull Live readers have given their verdict on the decision to close the footpaths on the Humber Bridge, with most resoundingly against the move.”
Usual caveats about self-selecting polls apply.
https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/4500-hull-live-readers-vote-5263070?fbclid=IwAR0d2sqEJbyoMPp33foFbEMdn6vf53gZ4IMb_cBGZ7OTQ-4LHG2ALJDBTI0
Have another look at Hull
Have another look at Hull Live, having run the clickbait survey, Hull Daily Mail/Hull Live are now running a campaign for Humber Bridge Board to take action to prevent suicides.
And being typical HDM, the picture they use showing the shared path closure is of the east side path which has been closed since 2019 because of maintenance work. Typical HDM hypocracy and low standards.
Just a few comments from a
Just a few comments from a local, sorry if they appear disjointed as the attitude of some people to this closure is affecting my personal mental health.
The Bridge Board are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t, unfortunately there has been a gradual increase in the numbers of attempted and actual suicides over the past couple of years, a lot of which are never reported. When these occur the bridge is closed to all users.
There has been a bus service over the bridge for some years, surely cyclists could adapt and leave their bikes at the Park & Rides then use the bus to get over the bridge.
I have personal knowledge of 2 of the people who commited suicide, one of them a 17 year old girl who was a close friend of my great neice, neither of them had ever discussed their mental health problems or indicated that they would commit suicide. How can you provide services to people who are not seeking it. It takes a great deal of effort to commit suicide, it’s not the easy get out people think it is.
If I remember correctly, when the Humber Bridge was built it was initially designed as a road bridge with pedestrian walkways, the paths were designated as shared use at a later date.
Road traffic is the priority on the bridge because they are the ones literally paying to use it, the bridge was commissioned by Barbera Castle as part of an intended East Coast motorway linking Middlesborough, York, Hull, Lincoln and Cambridge to the M25, this motorway was later scrapped and as a result the bridge has been lossmaking ever since it was built and can only be maintained using the money it raises. Due to the largess of recent Governments, 50% of the debt was written off, this was the debt of the Tory controlled councils around the Humber, the remaining 50% is being paid for by Hull City Council, the only Labour controlled council at the time and they are still paying for the loan, any future loans for work on the bridge will have to be underwritten by Hull CC.
Currently the bridge is undergoing repairs to the east side because wear and tear and as a result the east side walkway is closed to all users and has been for some time so it can not be made into a cycling only lane as suggested by some.
As far as I know the indeffinate closure is because work will have to be planned and tendered for before it can be undertaken so the Bridge Board can not give any timings at this point.
Prehaps this is a time for the local councils to prove their cycling credentials by providing a low cost cyclist and bike shuttle over the bridge rather than putting all the onus on the Bridge Board.
Final couple of points.
Have a look at the history of the Valley Bridge in Scarborough and see how long it was closed before it could be made as suicide proof as possible then look at the engineering challenges the Humber bridge faces.
and
I’m not a NIMBY, I have been looking forward to lockdown ending so that I can cycle over the bridge to meet friends and enjoy coffee & cake at The Ropery cafe in Barton, this will no longer be possible, but I understand the reasoning behind the closure and if my inconvenience results in the saving of 1 life then I can cope with it.
Happy and safe cycling all.
Gus
Gus T wrote:
The entire remainder of this paragraph contradicts its first sentence.
Sorry if factual information
Sorry if factual information doesn’t fit.
I’ll break it down for you to make it easier to read.
1) Motor vehicles pay to use the bridge, that money goes towards the upkeep and interest on the debt along with monies from Hull CC
2) The bridge was originally commisioned by Barbera Castle as part of the proposed East Coast motorway which would have provided the traffic
3) The building of the bridge was funded by loans taken out from the treasury by Humberside CC and Hull CC
4) A sub sequent Government decided to scrap the East Coast motorway but did not write of the debt created.
5) Humberside CC was disolved and several new Councils were created including East Riding of Yorkshire Council, North Lincs Council and NE Lincs Councilk.
6) After much politicing to reduce the the cost of the bridge crossing, which was £3.00 for cars at that time, the Government at that time wrote off the debt’s of all the newly formed Tory councils but left Hull CC with their share of the debt, this enabled the cost of the crossing to be reduced to £1.50
7) The Bridge Board and Hull CC have to fund the interest payments and repairs from the revenues raised and council tax if there is a shortfall.
Hope this now makes sense to you.
Motor cycles are free on the
Motor cycles are free on the Humber Bridge.
Thanks for that, it’s a long
Thanks for that, it’s a long time since I rode a motorcycle, nowadays I only cross the bridge by bike or if carrying large objects, by car
Gus T wrote:
— Gus TAre you saying what I think you’re saying? That the only non-tory council was also the only one left with the debt? Which particular government did this?
Yes, and it was the same
Yes, and it was the same Government that abolished Student Grants
Gus T wrote:
I appreciate your contribution but I have to agree there’s a flaw in the logic. Cars should pay because they do the most damage but surely ALL council tax payers should be able to walk and cycle across it as they are paying for it as well.
In normal circumstances I
In normal circumstances I would fully agree with you, unfortunately with the increasing number of people choosing to end their lives at the bridge, the Bridge Board had to do something quickly. As I said in the beginning, they’re dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t.
And despite claims to the alternative, I have never seen them show any bias against pedestrians or cyclists.
Gus T wrote:
quite f*cking right the owners of motor vehicles literally pay. They are literally the ones who cause most damage….
MiddlesBROUGH.
MiddlesBROUGH.
Quite right, I got so used to
Quite right, I got so used to calling it “the Boro” when I lived there that I added an extra O
Just to ask;
Just to ask;
Are the barriers to entry by foot or bicycle actually unscaleable or is it a matter of a few cones and a couple of notices?
Is this an exercise in avoiding accountability in the cheapest way possible or a genuine attempt to prevent suicide deaths?
Why is it only closed to
Why is it only closed to cycilist and not cars Can someone just drive park there car and jump off or only cyclist do this. In Ontario we had the same problem It was sovled by a big fence covering the bridge.
I have to agree with this
I have to agree with this point of view. Is there any evidence that people only walk or cycle to the bridge to commit suicide? If there’s a need to close the bridge to prevent tragic acts (and the statistics certainly seem to suggest that there are an inordinately large number of incidents there), then close it completely, along with the car-park at the end, to prevent anyone accessing it. This would also solve the problems of paying for upkeep!
I live there and many people
I live there and many people have parked up in the car parks, walked across and jumped.
I’m another local and as
I’m another local and as swldxer says people do drive to the bridge but they do not park their cars on the bridge, they park elsewhere and walk up to the pathways to end their lives.
Mybike wrote:
The bridge is more than a mile long with a dual carriageway on it. You can’t stop and park your car on it, if you did the emergency services would be over very quickly.
Plus there is a very strong physcological barrier to just stopping your car in traffic on a high speed road. Most suicides decisions are short term states of mind which that reaction not to stop and be the odd one out recieving public scorn would overide.
Ergo people who drive to the bridge park at either end and jump off are pedestrians who would be blocked by said barrier.
massive4x4 wrote:
And so to return to Mybike’s question. Why are cyclists being prevented from using the bridge?
Because they are only allowed
Because they are only allowed on the same section they have closed for use by anyone. I suspect they have also stopped roller skaters and scooter riders and all sorts of other mobility options that would use the “footpath” section and not allowed to use the vehicular section.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Bingo, no good reason..
Of course providing a shuttle bus for peds (they may already be doing this), or permitting riders to use the carriage way whilst imposing a temporary speed limit and segregating lanes may be one way of sorting this out.
Another would be to provide a shuttle bus for riders too.…
It’s not fair or appropriate
It’s not fair or appropriate is it? The only reason the bridge board has done this is because of their deep seated bias that the journeys of people that walk or cycle are not important- so closing access is an easy way for them to wash their hands of the issue.
Sadly the rail network also has a lot of ‘incidents’, but you don’t see them closing the West Coast mainline ‘indefinitely..’
Actually they have, you can’t
Actually they have, you can’t cycle on the West Coast Mainline and there are notices on all railway lines saying “Private Property – Keep Off”
This is an interesting take
This is an interesting take on the situation. A local cyclist tries to ride across the bridge, is told to use the main carriageway, does so, but is stopped by police. The interesting bit starts at 2:28 and finishes at 3:50.
An update this morning:
A press release this morning. Nothing has changed, but…
https://www.humberbridge.co.uk/2021/04/06/humber-bridge-statement/
Woldsman wrote:
That’s a good press release that’s changed my initial reaction to the news (i.e. not just a cheap thoughtless solution). It’s very sad that there’s been so much increase in young people with problems.
Woldsman wrote:
At least that puts their actions into context, but why didn’t they issue this statement immediately instead of waiting so long after closing the paths? Worth noting that they refer only to the “footway”. Cyclists literally don’t exist, and even if they do, they are of no account.
I think that is just them
I think that is just them trying to distinguish that part of the bridge and they do mention still looking at other measures for commuters on foot or by bike. Other bridges like the QE at dartford do Bike crossings for free so why not run something similar?
How many cyclists have taken
How many cyclists have taken their own lives? I bet the answer is incredibly small compared to pedestrians (that parked cars at the end).
Close it to pedestrians, not cyclists, if that’s your answer to solve mental health issues.
I thought they decided to ban
I thought they decided to ban everyone as it is easier to put a structure block on the path to stop anyone encroaching but so far it just seems to be coned and a securityguard. Surely have them chat to everyone crossing and looking for warning signs? Or just put higher fences along the sides.
The Erskine Bridge over the
The Erskine Bridge over the Clyde had a similar problem which was resolved by a clever design of barrier which prevents climbing over
They have that a special
They have a special fence on the Clifton suspension bridge too.
I suspect that putting it along both sides of a two mile suspension bridge is quite a big (and expensive) task, though…
brooksby wrote:
only needs to be installed on one side, leaving the other side closed.
brooksby wrote:
It’s a key part of the entire project. It’s not expensive to ensure that an essential right of way is safe to use, especially when measured against the overall budget.
This was clearly a miss in the original project and needs correcting.
40 years ago such things
40 years ago such things werent considered a necessary part of bridge design,thankfully weve moved on abit since then.
And I imagine it will be expensive to fix,purely because of the high winds factor and that’s it a grade 1 listed structure which means you wont get permission to put any old barrier up.
Awavey wrote:
Folk have chosen this method of suicide ever since suspension bridges were built – it was a well known issue 40 years ago, not considering it was definitely a miss.
AS you point out though we have moved on, and we know from bitter experience that the risk is there. The miss needs correcting.
This correction has been made to Clifton, Tower Bridge etc. Using listing as an excuse would be a cop-out.
The “expense” issue is also a red herring. It is necessary. It was missed. It needs fixing. The root of the cost is not the fence itself, it is the failure to put it up in the first place. A country that can spend 1b on a roundabout is perfectly capable of finding the money to update a right of way with an essential safety feature.
What is a pedestrian or
What is a pedestrian or cyclist expected to do? Go round by Goole? Or not commute to work?
The Humber Bridge Board should provide a shuttle service to carry people who are banned from crossing the bridge through no fault of their own.
It says on their website “The Humber Bridge is currently open to all traffic, except for abnormal loads wider than 4 metres (13.1ft) or heavier than 44 tons.”
Some people say that cyclists should catch a bus, but that doesn’t help those who need the bike to reach their final destination.
4-caster wrote:
Clearly they are expected to NOT be a pedestrian or cyclist. Remember, “If It Saves One Life” (TM)
Curious why the carriageway
Curious why the carriageway hasn’t been closed due to the “recent incident”… can anyone confirm that it’s absolutely impossible to drive on the bridge and then jump off of it?